WA.

1.e

:2 C

LD

WATERTOWN ARSENAL

0 LABORATORY

MEMORANDUM REPORT

NO. WAL 61/14

BY D !yviiliw L. WarnerSr. Welding RngizneerOC1798

C-

l~l-i I This document ham been approved Ttot piblic. r lease cA sale; its

Li._.. Lditibuti .)n i3 unlimited.DATE 25 ww 194s

WATERTOWN ARSENALWATERTOWN, MASS.

84 10 10 124

DIC

IarI-urfci byun~l Meta-Ar bee ldirv

Mefordu Report- relas and sale; it0.0. rojec T~1'tic"

diiDTICio isUlmtd

WATERTOWN ARSENAL LABORATORY

Authorized by: ORDSLMaterials 25 14sY 1948

0.0. Project Number: TB I-407

Report Number: WAL 642/146 - Memorandum Report

Priority, 33

Title of 0.0. Project: Rard-Gurfacing by Welding •

WAL Project No: 13.1-T

TITLZ

IABD-S ACING BY MTAL-ARC EILDING

Preliminary Stu y ofCommercially Available Electrodes for Nrd-Surfacing

OJECT

1. To obtain comparative data on several commercial brands of hard-

surfacing welding electrodes, available in the Welding Laboratory, andthe weld metal deposits obtainable, with reference to the followingfactors:-

a. Smoothness and ease of operation of electrode. Uri

b. Surface smoothness and soundness of deposit.,c. Deposit hardness level.d. Susceptibility to check cracking or separation

from the base metal. ,4e. Chemical composition of deposit.f. Abrasion resistance of deposit.

(1) Dry abrasion(2) Vet abrasion(3) Various contact pressures(4) Various lengths of stroke

(5) Various rates of stroke(6) Various lengths of testing time - .

g. Corrosion resistance of deposit.h. Uetallographic structure of deposit. -'

i. Susceptibility of deposit to hardening by co]4,tWorking (peeninag) and the effect of suchhardening on abrasion resistance.

2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0

2. If possible, to develop a practicable test for determining com-parative abrasion resistance of hard-surfacing weld deposits. With sucha test it is hoped to be able to classify commercial brands of electrodes,and perhaps welding rods, for qualification and acceptance under Speci-fication 57-203-5.

SMMRY

1. In the work covered by this report some nineteen (19) commercialbrands of hard-surfacing electrodes were tested of which twelve (12)brand gave weld metal deposits suitably free from porosity and cracks topermit of abrasion and corrosion testing. The data obtained pertainprimarily to objectives la, b, c, d, e, f(2), f(6), g, and h.

2. Welding data are given in Table I, compositions of weld metalsin Table II and abrasion test data in Tables III and IV. Electrodes Band D show highest abrasion resistance and Electrode C the lowest. See

Tables V and Va. All three electrodes are brands presently approvedunder Specification 57-203-5.

3. Corrosion test data are given in Table VI. These data indicatethat those weld metals which gave highest abrasion resistance exhibitlowest corrosion resistance.

4, The results of metallographic examination of nine (9) of thetwelve (12) weld metals abrasion tested are shown by Figures 9 to 17inclusive.

1. The data included in this report are regarded as indicatingtrends since the program of testing originally planned was not completed.

2. The abrasion test data indicate that two of the electrodes,approved under Specification 57-203-5, deposit weld metal having thehighest resistance t% abrasion of any of the twelve (12) metals tested,whereas the weld metal from a third approved electrode brand exhibits thelowest resistance to abrasion. Thus the combination of soundness andhardness level of weld metal does not appear to be an adequate criterionof abrasion resistance.

3. Those weld metals which gave good abrasion resistance appear tohave the lowest resistance to corrosion.

3 •

0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4. There does not appear to be a typical metallographic structureof void metal, indicative of good abrasion resistance, which can be vAedas a criterion for approval testing.

L/ WILLIAM L. WAM

APPROV3fD: Senior Welding Ingineer

P. . GILLONLt Col, Ord DeptDirector of Laboratory

0

...0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 . . .

NOTE:-This form is to be executed to show proposed distribution, and forwarded in triplicate to the

Chief of Ordnance for prior approval of 11 distributions. Proposed distribution to agencies

or individuals whose official interest in the report is not obvious must be justified by ex-

planatory statenmnts on the back of this form. S 0

BINDIM2 AREA FORM NO. ORDBE-342L. (Rev.) 2 Sept. 1947 BINDING AREA

COPIES WATERTOWN ARSENAL EXTRA COPIES

PRE PARED- -F TECHNICAL REPORT DISTRIBUTION RE MA I N I NG

RE PORT NO- t. .'L TITLE:

T -J T

TO: = << TO: s - '

WATERTOWN ARSENAL-ORDBE OTHER:labcratcrv File -

Author: -

OFFICE, CHIEF OF ORDNANCEORDIR-Artillery

ORD IM-Amm II IonORDIT-AUtomotive -.

ORDIS-Small Arms

ORDTB-Resl. & Materials -

ORDTM-AIiLion Dev.

ORDTR-Artlllery Dev.

ORJYS-Smll Arms Dev. __.

ORDTT-Tank Automotive - -

OR=l-Roc ket Dev.

ORDTX-Execut lyeORDTX-AR - Executive Library _

ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT AGENCIES '_ORDA-Frankiford Arsenal I -

ORDBB-P catInny Arsenal

ORDBC-RoCk Island Arsenal - -• S

flRDD-SDrlngfleld Armory_

ORDBF-Waterv Iet Arsenal

ORD-Aberdeen Prov. Ground - -

ORWJR-Rarl tan Arsenal

ORDMX-Detrolt Arsenal

ORDTZ-berdeen Prv.Gr.-.& D.Ctr. ___

APPROVING AUTHORITY:S Ltr.: t66i:! n,= 1 11911kirm•

Date: -From:

I- w" ' W S 0ga

I~,.;

9 0

?7MDCTIOT

U. S. Armq Specification 57-203-5 (7 October 194) covers two clausesof welding electrodes for hard-surfacing as follows:-

Cla A- lard-lacing, Perrous Alloy (See Par. i-4)Mlass 3- Hard-Pacing, Jerrous Alloy, partially austenitic

(See Par. X-5)

Paragraph E-. '"lass A electrodes are intended for depositingsurfacesresistant to abrasion where subsequent machining isnot required. These electrodes are used with direct currentonly. I

Paragraph X-5. "Class 3 electrodes are intended for use inhard-facing where cold working under load will harden thesurface, thus increasing the wearing qualities. Tha' are usedwith direct current only."

The Detail Requirements prescribed for these two classes of weldingelectrodes are as follows:-

Hardness (Par. 1-2b). 'The hardness of weld metal deposited 'byClass A electrodes shall be not less than 475 Brinell with the steel ball,3000 Kg. load (Rockwell o-49). The hardness of weld metal deposited byClass B electrodes shall be not more than 296 Brinell with the steel ball,3000 Kg. load (Rockwell C-30). When peened, as prescribed by paragraphA-50, the weld metal of Class 3 electrodes shall exhibit a minimum hard-ness of 4S Brinell with the steel ball, 3000 Kg. load (Rockwell 0-50).'

Smoothness & Soundness (Par. 1-2c). "Ilectrodes shall be capable ofproducing on low carbon steel plate, Class A, U. S. Army Specification57-114-1, by a commercially practicable procedure, a weld deposit, freeof cracks and injurious porosity, which will not resuire the grinding offof more than 1/16 inch in depth of the deposited metal at any point toobtain a contimously plate s-urface for the hardness test."

The methods of testing the hard-facing deposits, for qualificationby laboratory test, are prescribed as follows:-

Hardness & Soundness (Par. 7-3d). "The hardness and soundness ofdeposit of the electrodes shall be determined by making a single-layerdeposit of at least 2 square inches in area on low carbon steel plate notless than 1/2-inch thick. The surface of this deposit shall be ground

6

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S 0 •

off sufficiently to make at least nine Rockwell "C" hardness determina-tions, not less than l/4 inch apart, and a visual and magnetic examina-tion for cracks and porosity in the deposited metal."

Peening (Par. 7-5c). IThe peening test for weld metal deposited byClass B electrodes shall be performed with an air hammer under thefollowing conditions:

1. Maximum air pressure, 90 pounds.2. Air hammer to be equipped with piston of not over

1 1/8-inch diameter and -having a maximum lengthof stroke of 2 inches.

3- Peening tool with spherical face of not less than2-inch radius.

4. Peening to be performed in a continuous operationon the ground surface of the deposit such that anarea of 2 square inches is adequately covered innot less than 20 seconds nor more than 30 secondsof elapsed time. Pollowing this operation thepeened surface may be reground for hardness testingbut in no case more than a 1/32-inch depth of metalshall be removed for this purpose."

Radiography(Par. 7- ). Radiographic examination may be made ofany test deposits laid down with the electrodes to determine compliancewith paragraph 3-2c."

The inadequacy of these requirements for properly classifying hard-facing materials is recognized but they represent the best compromisewhich could be reached based upon the data available when the specifica-tion was prepared. However, because of the realization that hardnessand soundness of deposit do not necessarily indicate the ability of ametal to resist abrasion it was desired to investigate a number of commer-cial brands of hard-facing welding electrodes which were available in theWelding Laboratory. It was thought that some method of abrasive testingthese metals might be found which would give a more practicable andreliable basis for appraisal than the determination of soundness and hard-ness of metal deposit as prescribed by Specification 57-203-5.

It was originally planned to obtain data also on the response ofcertain of these metals to peening after deposition but this phase ofthe program was not started because of termination of the work on thisproject due to personnel reduction on 1 July 1947. This report, there-fore, covers the deposition and abrasion and corrosion testing of thedeposits from some nineteen (19) brands of electrodes, as listed in

7 0

• S S 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0D 0

Table I, completed prior to 1 July 1947- Electrodes B. C and D had pre-viously received anproval under Specification 57-207-5 by LaboratoryQualification Test as prescribed above for Class A Electrodes.

TEST PROCEDUR

The first operation in testing the electrodes consisted in deposit-ing a pad of weld metal (two layers in all cases, except two) with eachof the electrodes to be tested, using the welding conditions indicatedby Table 1. Each pad was annroximately 2 1/2 inches wide by 6 incheslong deposited on a niece of Ii2-ineh thick nlain low carbon steel plateabout I inches wide by 9 inches long. The pads were deposited on theplate in the flat position.

After welding was completed each pad was carefully examined forporosity, cracks and any evidence of separation of the weld metal fromthe base metal. If any of these defects were found the pad involved waseliminated from further testing. As shown by Table I twelve (12) of thepads were Judged satisfactory for abrasive testing and each of these wasthen machined and ground to the anproximate dimensions shown by Figure 1.From each of these Pamples two test specimens of the size and shape shownby Figure 2 were prepared for abrasive test.

a. Abrasive TestT'e tes' vnditions .2-:isen for abrarion testirg were Quits

arbitrary. The size and type of abrasive block selected is shown byFigure 2. It was decided to run the test with the abrasive surface flatand the test aoparatus was operated so as to move the abrasive block back

and forth idth the test qpecimen held stationary and in contact with theabrasive surface by A compression spring The abrasive block shown byFigure 2 was clamped flat upon the bed of a sliding carzise such thet themovement of the block during the test was longitudinal as indicated byFigure 2. The test wpecimen was held face down on the flat surface of theabrasive block by a calibrated compression spring assembled in a yokewhich spanned the sliding carriage and was bolted to toe base of the machine. S

A preliminary tryout of this setup was made with a dry abrasiveblock but after a very short run of a few minutes duration it was foundthat the abrasive block glazed over and lost its abrasive character. Thisnecessitated a tryout of either one of the two suggested modifications oftest method -

(1) immersion of the abrasive block in some sortof a solvent which would float off the particles

S 0

of abraslon and thus prevent the abrasivesurface from glasing over, or

(2) tilt the whole mechanism through 90' in order toput the abrasive surface in a vertical positionso that the particles of abrasion would dropaway without Imbedding in the abrasive surface.

Since the second method would involve considerable redesign ofthe apparatus as well a machine-work and felay in running the tests itwas decided to try the solvent idea. The sliding carriage was fitted withsides of sufficient else to hold a depth of liquid adequate to Just coverthe abrasive surface and several trial runs were made using Salvasol #5as the solvent. These runs definitely indicated the feasibility of opera-tion over considerable periods of time without glazing of the abrasivesurface and consequently the data on abrasion included in this report wereobtained by tests run with the abrasive block completely immersed in Sal-vasol #5. To tests were made with the abrasive surface vertical and with-out a solvent.

b. ard-essoththe Rockwell and the Tickers methods were used. The Tickers

(with 10 Xg. load) surveys were made with impressions taken 0.02' apart inthe approximate locations shown by Figure .. Rockwell "C' readings weretaken on the top surface of the abrasion specimens (Figure 2) in the endsoneu which are not affected by the abrasion test.

a. ChemistrySince the metals included in this investigation were too hard

for machining, it was necessary to obtain samples for chemical analysis bya somewhat unorthodox method. A specimen similar to that shown by Figure4 wu used and the low carbon steel basa metal was comletely removed bymachining and grinding so that only the hard-facing metal remained. Thishard-facing metal plate was broken up with a hammer and reduced to a coarsepowder in a mortar and pestle. This coarse powder was then dissolved byacid to form a solution for analysis.

d. Corrosion-1e -orrosion test specimens of the hard-facing deposits are as

shown by Figure 5. In preparing these specimens care was exercised toremove all of the low carbon base metal from the back of the hard-facingmetal deposit.

For the corrosion tests a 10% sodium chloride solution was usedat a room temperature and the specimens were suspended in this solutionusing special ichrome V wire holders coated with stopoff Unichrome 323.

90

0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S S

The specimens were thoroughly cleaned, before immersion in the saltsolution, by degreasing with trichlorethylene, then anodic cleaning in analkaline cleaner, rinsing in hot water and drying with compressed air.hach specimen was then carefully weighed and immersed in the salt solution.

During the test compressed air was used to provide aeration andagitation of the salt solution. The compressed air was available onlyduring the day shift (9200 AM - 1 '0 PM).

At the end of each run the samples were removed from the saltsolution, rinsed in warm water, scrubbed with soap and toothbrush, againrinsed in warm water, given a 5-volt cathodic treatment in 10% ammoniumcitrate at 120PY. for one minute, rinsed in hot witer (about 1200F.), anddried with compressed air. Specimens were then carefully weighed and theweight lost determined.

e. MetallographyAfter the Vickers hardness surveys had been made as indicated in

Figure 3 the specimen surfaces were repolished for microexamination.Ztching was done with Vilella's Reagent. Photomicrographs were taken at250 diameters at the following approximate locations:

A & I- Center of 2nd layer of hard-facing metalB & P - Junction of 2nd & lst layersC & G - Center of lst layerD & H - Junction of lst layer and base metal

Photomicrographe at 1000 diameters were also taken at the first

three locations cited above. (See Figures 9 to 17).

TZST DATA & DISCUSSION

a. Abrasive TestThe results of abrasive testing these hard-facing metals by the

procedure described are given by Tables III and IV. It will be noted thatthe duration of test was 6 hours for the data of Table III whereas for thedata of Table IV the duration was I hours. Different specimens from thesame sample (Figure 1) were used for each of the two tests but otherwisethe testing conditions were the same for both specimens.

While these data are regarded as inadequate to establish an abra-sion testing criterion for qualification tests of commercial brands ofelectrodes it is of interest to note that Electrodes B. C and D are approvedunder Specification 57-20'-5 in accordance with the test requirements asgiven in the Introduction to this report.

10 5

C S

It is apparent from the data of these two series of abrasiontests that the weight lost and amount of abrasive wear may be proportion-al to the length of time under abrasion, at least in the case of Speci-mens #2, 4 and 13. With the other metals tested the weight lost andamount of abrasive wear are considerably greater in proportion in thatthe results of the 6-hour test are from I to 10 times the results fromthe 3-hour test. There ratios are indicated by Table V.

These data indicate cuite clearly that acceptance of hard-facing metals on the basis of hardness values aoes not necessarily insuresatisfactory abrasion resisting properties. Considerable further testingof these materials under a variety of loads and abrasive conditions wouldbe necessary to establish satisfactory criteria for qualification testingof abrasion resistance under Specification 57-P0-5.

* b. Hardness & SoundnessThe results of the Vickers hardness surveys are shown by Table

VI. The Rockwell "C" values obtained on the abrasion test specimens aregiven in Tables III and IV. It may be noted that nearly all of the metalstosted in the abrasion test show Rockwell hardness values above the 0-49minimum presently specified for qualification under 57-203-r. From thestandpoint of soundness all but two of the metals tested in abrasion, aslisted in Table IV, were free from check cracks (Table I). The surfaceappearance of the weld deposits from which these nine samples were takenis shown by Figures 6, 7 & S. These data indicate that hardness level isnot a satisfactory criterion for determining abrasion resistance.

c. ChemistrvThe results of chemical analyses of these weld metals are given

by Table II It may be noted that two of the three approved brands ofweld metal (#2 & #4) contain "zearly 5"% tungsten each whereas the third (#3)contains none of this metal. Two others (#5 & 1#12) each contain about 1btungsten and the rest of the metals do not. In all cases chromium appearsto be a base element of composition together with high carbon.

It is interesting to note that Specimen #13 which shows anabrasion resistance nearly equal to #2 and #4 does not contain tungstenbut does have the highest carbon content (0o. %) of ar of the metalstested. These data suggest that the chemistry of weld metal is not a sat-isfactory criterion for determining abrasion reqistanceo

d. CorrosionThe results of the corrosion tests as shown by Table VII, while

generally inconclusive, do show that Specimen #9 is most resistant to

11 5

4P 9 9 a a 0 0 S W W

corrosion by the sat solution used for this test. The other metalsappear to be affected to about the same extent as plain low carbon steel.

It is interesting to note that, although Specimen #3 hasslightly more chromium'than Specimen #9, its corrosion resistance isnoticeably less. It is possible that this result is due to the highermanganese content of Specimen #3 over Specimen #9 (see Table II). Thisobservation is further strengthened by the fact that Specimens #2 and#4 show the greatest weight lost in corrosion (at 154 hours) but havethe largest manganse content (3%-) with a low chromium content (3%-4), 0and both exhibit the best abrasion resistance. This suggests that whatis good for abrasion is not goo& for corrosion or visa versa.

e. MetallograipbThe results of microexamination are shown by Figures 9 to 17

inclusive. In each of these Figures the approximate locations of thephotomicrographs in the weld metal deposit are shown on the macrograph.All of these metals appear to be dendritic and on the higher magnifica-tion (1000 diam.) a number of them show acicular structure characteristicof martensite at the 50 Rockwell "0" hardness level.

Specimns #2 and #4, which show best abrasion resistance underthe conditions of testing used, do not show like structures although bothare of similar composition except for carbon (tigureelOB & 123). Thepoorest metal in resistance to abrasion, Specimen #3, is a manganese-chromium steel of hardness level about the same as Specimens #2 and #4 butits structure appears to be more like that of white cast iron.

Specimen #4, which gave best abrasion resistance of all themetals tested, exhibits a rather fine-grained homogeneous structure withno grain boundary segregation (Figure 12E). Ulhether such a structure ofbard metal is generally indicative of good abrasion resistance irrespec-tive of composition at a 50 Rockwell "C" hardness level is not known.

12 S

* 0 0 5 0 S 0 S S S 0 S

4) 4-1 43 4p ) 4 4-V 4sa 0 al 0 0 a to a

Io 0 ) 4) 4) a) 4) W) 4) 4)-1*E4 E-4 E-4 E-4 E-4 E4' E E-4 E4

514 100 MO4 $G) w M( U) ) 4) ;40 $4 1) p~ ~00 ~ . o 0 w > 0 t o o > oU lb p 0;

%- W 0 +4 . 4 ~44 4"4H - 4-14 -H +4 C 4 -- H4 -4 -4 4-4 4

$4 N) P

-4 .4 .- 4 lv4S 0A -4-

0 0 0 0 W4 00 4)cc 0~ on MU 01 0 4;4' &1 ~ i0 o14o4J 'd4

04> 14 a kM $4 0 . k0 0 0 a0 0P~ 4 0 ;4 - 0 0 Pi$

4rd10 r 4 0 0 0 0.. ~ 140)

$4 4 $4 N r= 0 $ 4 140)0 ?0 4) 0 4)c 14 0)) 0 0) 0 4)0 2.

4a 4, ~ 4. .1 0 4-. $A4' 4> 0 -

4X 4) 4) 4- P, 4 1 4' 4)0 1.'

0ci U00 -4

,40~ : 4A4 aOOo P4-

04 0 0 0 0

0' 0' 141 ON4 -4

0 -40) 0 4 0) 0 o) -I

c; '.0 C; 0. CD0 I

r-4~~~~- r44 4 4 - uW C

--- 4 14 0

4- .4 ' tS - aP9-4 4 cc

cu u c cu cu u C c 4) -

S 4-

0 LCN UlC U-A$

4>

cc 0

011

ID~~ ~ ~ ~ 14Ci ON-r Lr\1

4.4

02 TABLE I

40 I.> 4)V 4 4) *a 4> 4) 4a

6) 0 )0 0 6) 0 aE-4 4 E-4 94 1 94 E4 E-4 E4

0I 0 ~ 0~ wf 0~ > 0~ or 0 ~ o 0> b

4 4 04 4 -04 .4 %4 4 W 0-404 0*4

4) 4z

* 00

0 Id 4 a $4 a 6) T)

P4 .0 -S 06$. 0

S 4). 0~ Q 0

94 431 I~ ;.0 oz 0

0q In to pq 0 4

-d 0 044094 x o3 0 0H0 0 0 0 0n

0 14 94I -4 W

4)* 0 944)0& 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 ) r-4 0-

L 0- 0 0 ) 0 0 W ~ 0- -

0 o - c; E-4 E4-4 E- q Pfri4o 4 409-s

ti r-4 r-I to r-4 b4 k) 4o) 14 0 0

0 .

4-1 cu '.u cu Cu Cu Cu Cu Cu4

to c-. %10 L4i LC L. C r L'H f- r- H H rI 0- 1q 1q 9-

9r-4

04> *- cS " r\ l ' l\ L% L

b0 5 0 S 0 0 OP M 02 v 0 0

00

*13

lop

I I IGROUND

ILOwC ARBON BASEPLATE HARDFACIN~z

5 ECION, LANYERS

A- Hc0LD FOR~ CH-ECKx 965PECIALTES T

5- PECTROGIRAPH c6- CREMICAL ANALY >15 aS -

C B A1R SIONTEsT (Fitur2)Z SPECIMENS

D- PICR, 96 \'iCKER5 H~ARD j E55i7-(Fi ' 90Ie

* -CoR~fossIo TE -T (FI u rS 0

HARD FAcHGwisDEPD5ir LAYCUI-Fib- U RS

F 0AC

DI RECTION OF rIEMEN-T

OF ABRASIVE BLOCK

Y-E5T 5pECIMIEN c6- A(3RA!51VE 13LOC~ I S

Figura 2

ItS

/7/8

H H

HARD FAC IC S

HARDNE5 f IC RO

PiQuR E %35

GRIND SuRFAcE SMOOTH

FEmoviNr Nor OVER

MICRO PO LI(3HErcH AFr~i$5PECTROGRAPH

SPCTROVGRAPH

C HiPs Foei -L AYE R

CHiips Fog I!-' LAYER

8PE-Cl MIEN

3PECTROGRAFH c6CHErMUCAL ANALYSIS

FIG.URE+

5 U A R U D

B30TH SIDES

COFRFasoN SPECIMIENof

HAR 1 FAciNG METAL

FIGURE5

S 5 5 S 5 0 5 5 5 S 0 0 S S

'. . ~ 1. 4 X (3 V 0 2W

r- ~ :t4 0. f0. 0*C * 4 0

0s 0 0- C a 0 0 0 0 04 0

LCNr. -4 w. w. CU to %.0 w cu (7

0 -4 r4 0 w. r4 0 %'.0 C 4 '40*CS * O a S S

541 V#4 0 & U CU - 0 '0

-4 0 te r .-i PA C 0 O C%; t- L '.a '.0'4 '4 4 f-I

r- a%' q% r- w rp- -- %. tE4 4 r4 0 0 0 0 0 CP 0 '4 t1'b \JD

o 0 a% ff '.D w t"' w #-I UlC 1- tf-\

cvI r-4 0 cu 0 0 CU 0 cu cu cm fn-

*r4 NJd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0(d 0 0 * 0

o2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0l 0 0 c0 0; C 0 0 0

w * 9 S :1 %. RS 7' *r 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0; C; 0; 0; 0 0

b ~ Lt a% ^, P- CN t0l a 0 &

0 W r4re\00 0 0 0 000

If% LC\ L *_- fa' U - \

0 0' 0- 0'- 0 0 0 a 0 0; 0 C

01 c Lri --t teA w Cr C' pe u-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TABLE TI

Abrasion Teat Data (6-hour run)

_ecimen Electrode Weight--grams Thicknens.in. Rockwell €"Before After Lost Before After 'd ear

1 A 3341445 33.1160 0°3285 0:4375 0.4323 0,0052 54 - 56

2 B 33,4947 33-345 0.i102 0,4366 0:4353 0,0013 49 - 51 0

3 r 3314045 32,7480 0,6565 0 4439 0,4330 0.,0109 52 - 54

4 D 33°9095 33-8300 0,0795 0,.h363 0,4356 0,0007 50 - 57

5 3403o45 34,oo4o 0,3005 o,42o 0o4392 0.0047 52 - 56 B.

5 H 33o4125 32,8020 0,61o5 0.1396 o,1296 0,0100 53 51

9 I 33.2780 32,9710 0-3070 o.4397 o.4336 0.0051 48 52

12 L 34.0135 33.564o 0,4495 0o,4432 o.4361 0.0071 51- 57

13 M 33,4540 33,2545 0.1995 o.4389 0o,436o 0.0029 42 -- 55

17 Q 3o7460 34,276o 0o,4700 o,4427 o.4345 0.002 54 - 61

19 R 3 4, 44105 32-9595 1,14520 o.41428 0.14179 0.0249 19 - 21

19 S 32.4263 31,-5546 0.717 o,4143 0,3997 o0O 146 214 - 26

Test Conditions. Load on specimner. 50 lb.Unit pressure on abrasion surface 107 lbosq.in, SLength of stroke 1"Rate of stroke 60/inn. (See Figure 2)

Time of run 6 hours,Abrasive block irnersed in Salvasol #5

TABLZ III

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 •

TABtX IV

Abrasion Tee Data (3}.hour run)

4pecimen Electrode Weight-grams Thickness-in. Rockwell "C"Before After Lost 3efore After Wear

2 B 34, 4145 34,3642 0.0503 o.433S 0.4329 0,0009 4T - 51

3 0 32,3560 32.2324 0o1236 0.4260 0.142o O000~o 52-55

14 D 34.4920 34.4505 0.0415 0.4317 0o4370 0.0007 49- 54

5 3 34.5260 34,4985 0.0275 Oo1,382 o.4378 o ~o4 51 - 56

9 H 33,8255 33,7260 0.995 o.4390 0.4360 0.0020 54 - 57 0

9 I 33.9175 33,-9-35 00740 o,4387 o,4376 o.ooi1 45 - 51

12 L 32,7'10 32.6o20 o.142o 0,4125 o.4105 0.0020 51 - 59

13 M 33.160 33,6925 0.1335 o.)4395 0.4360 0.0025 47 - 57

Test Conditionsv Load on specimen 50 lb.Uni't pressure on abrasion surface 107 b/sq.ino -

Length of stroke 1"Rate of stroke 60/min.Time of --= 3 hours. (See Tigure 2)Abrasive block immersed in Salvasol #5

TABLZ IV -

0 - 0 0 0 0 0 S

• • • • • • • • • • • •I

TABLE V

Weight Lost & Abrasive Wear vs. Time of Test*

Sample No. Weight Lost Grmms Abrasive Wear -Tnches

1-Hour Test 6-Hour Test Ratio 3-flour Test 6,.Eour Test Ratio*

2 .0503 o1102 2,ol 009 ,oo13 1.45

3 01236 .6565 5.30 .0020 ,0o09 5.45

o415 -0795 193 .0007 1OO

5 .0275 .30o5 10.90 0004 047 i1.75 S

8 .0995 ,6105 6 15 o0020 010 5.00

9 07 ,,M70 It.16 o0o1 voo051 4.65

12 ,,O1420 1495 3.16 .0020 .0071 3.55

13 .1335 .1995 3Q48 ,oo25 ,o323

AUsirng the value for the 3-Hour Test as unity

TABLX Va

*omparison of Metals on the Basis of Weight Lost & Abrasive Wear

Sample No Weight Lost Abrasive Wear

I Hours 6 Hours 3 Hours 6 Hours

2 1.53 1, 39 2.25 1.e6

3 45o 930 500 15.6o

4 1.51 1.001, 1 0

5 1.00 3o52 100 6,7"

5 3,61 7.70 5.00 14jo30

9 2.69 3,56 2.75 1,30

12 5.17 5.65 5.00 1010

13 4.55 25± 6.25 415

TABLAS V & Vs

.S S. " 0 S S S S

TABLZ VI

Vickers Hardness Range (10 Kgo Load)

Specimen Maximum Avereg Minimun

1 657 602 5i

2 585 505 394

a 3 b9 5T2 514

4 665 595 525

5 613 421

8 6Z 566 525 S

9 6,2 524 417

12 uG2 524 401

13 620 529

0

TABLE VI

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 ,,

J0 0

0 0

100

0

-4'4 .43

E.4 5454- CI

C-0 0

04

to %~l ?N 4H -4m -4 c

0

0.W) 4.

to .4% .4 . . 4 r4 .4 '4 r4

.4

.4 . . -494 -

.94

1-4

0

* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

11 , 7 -

o T-

cc

4ch

cr.

ofz

I--I)

L.1

LLa

.~ iiR

tv,' l , B se

qlll m t

IL*I

Laer ~~

I;~ ~All

l4

Lelijer I

~JAP

La ter 41~ISkWITN.63SIg 8I

B~~ X50p

5',~

ly.""

1t* A&I

C e5 Uk

oiL

D x z ~ .

ARD ~ ~ ACN AA

)-AR-FCN tt.ELEcTRODe A

Wlh.

F )A tOoo

wTk- F.C-~Q;RA3

SP.1 1 NO -x.M

No.-

UPI.

X Z50

La jer

,,4.

AIw E717:

WTN.63-9284 A 4 50F

4..

C ST

AA

IpI

IT 64

F:xiooo

WTN.63c-926

X10oo

'I Wel

0. 1,41W- b ase

~ZC14N ~.3 x3

A X250E

ND?

Lo~e

*I

L ~er '

iAAx

5e~~e X250

Mle-th HARD-FAciNGr M ETAL) ELECTRODE CWTN.639...gea

F I GUE I,-. 11

ir

e' *. *--.289

4. '( -0

~~~ .. F metal

s'3CIM3 No.. x3

I A

4.'A

' ,, *

La er .1414~'~s

4 SIX

Z H 1 -,f

x'p.INI.

Lck3er

4 ST

WTN.639--Q&-N#

V "i

~ E - / S

Ile~tbill

Bae

Base HARD-FACING MIETAL, ELECTRODEmeN t a-~~ I ---------

FIGURY, MO. 12

4k

E ±ooo

WTN .639-O92

YG.00

CD~ O.5 x3

- *d. ~ ~ . 4

L ..e.4

r-,- p.

'~to-

41 "

er V

L ~Z~ eraej' j.~~***,fW T N . 6 3 ,I P , , . . . ..1 3 X Z 5 0

.- ~I ~.'~'z7 -~* ~ L

MeI. K;,

itI&

mea xz5OQ

T .6 3 9-W-4 HARD-ACLIJ WG METAL~ ELECTRODE E

iIGrURE NO. 13

xjtooo

WTN.639.-9295

A&A

i xi000

Bose

3S a

ft 4

ee MAIl

-STeI -,

Ole

WTN639%' X9 5

mie-ta I

fose .4

La~jr-

c x ~Z50

4

Ba~seDk- MetaI HARD-FAcNG IMerAL ELECTRODE.'

WTN.639 -9297

I: FIGURE NO. 14+

141

~~Y A- o,

J4 4

JL000

I IL

E "4000

WTN.639-99

CC J-ooo

I1/

metali

Ba~sem~etal

I SPECIM i4 O. x3

ti~ b

AA ;

-, ,

.0-L

J3fIPW x~ Nb *

U'kt.t

4 ST

II

C XZ50 O

MetcF~ti M1ETAL) ELECTRODE

15

. .......... .. .. .. .. . . ... .. .............................

4

)DEE WTNiOOO30

Gc A i ~ 0

W

-;wn Ilk-

F )4000

WTN.639.-9301

A 11000

Ba~se

m eta~

appCINu ho. 12 x3

7--

Lcpjr .-W

;r- k

?ND l )

I 4

ST.

wTNj.639-0302

B X250

S T ~L Ito

LcL er.> .

f66

We~AW

.03

(eta DI25jr.14

FIGUB.3 M~. 16

I IF

A44 7/'

E 4oo

WTN.639-9304

ELECTROD

A16r.*.~ .

-w

U..

E X±oo

*fA

441-

wTN.639-.Q304

x x~oo

~WeIA

m Heta I

SPZCIMIZN NO- 13 X-3

~4: ,t %*

40

L Nje D~~'

S6. '

4' 4P

~ij

BX x250F

41

Meta

AnS

La~~FIer NO. 17 -.

4V.4

~ ~ E iooo

00

F Y, iooo

ECTO.DE P1WTN .639-0307

Y, Jboo

E x 100-

WTN.639-9307

Y,- i-